NVIDIA GeForce 920MX vs AMD Radeon R5 M330
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 920MX and AMD Radeon R5 M330 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
- Videocard is newer: launch date 10 month(s) later
- Around 1% higher core clock speed: 965 MHz vs 955 MHz
- Around 37% higher texture fill rate: 28.22 GTexel / s vs 20.6 GTexel / s
- Around 13% lower typical power consumption: 16 Watt vs 18 Watt
- Around 80% higher memory clock speed: 1800 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- Around 79% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1068 vs 596
- Around 53% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1764 vs 1155
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3691 vs 1850
- Around 25% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2691
- Around 53% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1764 vs 1155
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3691 vs 1850
- Around 25% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2691
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 25 March 2016 vs 5 May 2015 |
Core clock speed | 965 MHz vs 955 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 28.22 GTexel / s vs 20.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 16 Watt vs 18 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1068 vs 596 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1764 vs 1155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 vs 1850 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 2691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1764 vs 1155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 vs 1850 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 2691 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 M330
- Around 4% higher boost clock speed: 1030 MHz vs 993 MHz
- Around 25% higher pipelines: 320 vs 256
- Around 9% better floating-point performance: 659.2 gflops vs 602.1 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 3.5x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 519 vs 150
- Around 49% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5874 vs 3954
Specifications (specs) | |
Boost clock speed | 1030 MHz vs 993 MHz |
Pipelines | 320 vs 256 |
Floating-point performance | 659.2 gflops vs 602.1 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 519 vs 150 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5874 vs 3954 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R5 M330
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 920MX | AMD Radeon R5 M330 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1068 | 596 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 150 | 519 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3954 | 5874 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1764 | 1155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 | 1850 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 2691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1764 | 1155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 | 1850 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 2691 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 385 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 69.096 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 920MX | AMD Radeon R5 M330 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GM108 | Exo |
Launch date | 25 March 2016 | 5 May 2015 |
Place in performance rating | 1001 | 926 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R5 300 Series | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | 1030 MHz |
Core clock speed | 965 MHz | 955 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 602.1 gflops | 659.2 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 256 | 320 |
Texture fill rate | 28.22 GTexel / s | 20.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 16 Watt | 18 Watt |
Compute units | 5 | |
Transistor count | 1,040 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 14.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers | ||
DualGraphics | ||
HD3D | ||
PowerTune | ||
Switchable graphics | ||
ZeroCore |